Solo will still be manufactured.

[yt lee]

If you design and manufacture the replacement Solo from scratch, the r&d + manufacture+ support+ marketing+ distribution may cost $1000 unit cost.

But to duplicate one, it wouldn't take more than $300 at today's part costs because you don't waste money on r&d etc. The issues now are IP and tainted name. As for marketing and support, it will follow the current knockoff model.

BTW, if you believe it cost more than $300 to assemble a Solo knockoff, you are out of touch regarding Chinese manufacture capacity. Just take a look at wechat drone or xioami drone, check out their prices. Do they selling it at $1000?

Cheerson CX20 has been very successful in the knockoff market selling at sub $200 is another example. Upgrade the cheerson cx20 FC, GPS add a $50 gimbal, you have a decent AP drone for less than a P3S. Replace the firmware with solo, you get yourself a Solo knockoff .

Folk , just because you paid $1000 for your drone doesn't mean it will take another $1000 to replace one. If you still holding on such outdated thinking, I bet you are still holding on your old pc which you paid few thousand for and it's capacity is less than your current smart phone.

 

[Morongobill]

Who knows, maybe they will license it to one of the knock off manufacturers.

 

[SARDG]

Who knows, maybe they will license it to one of the knock off manufacturers.

I suppose that's a possibility - after the remaining 50,000 real Solos are unloaded and 3DR has nothing to lose. And at that point, they'll be throw-aways after a crash because no one is crazy enough to offer a warranty like 3DR's ever again.

 

[yt lee]

I suppose that's a possibility - after the remaining 50,000 real Solos are unloaded and 3DR has nothing to lose. And at that point, they'll be throw-aways after a crash because no one is crazy enough to offer a warranty like 3DR's ever again.

At $400-500 price range, it is almost like disposable items. But I think who pick up the Solo design will add feature to justify the price increase. I believe off the bat, OA (object avoidance) will be among the first.

The reason I believe Solo design will live on because OA will be a FAA mandated item. Those who implemented into the firmware or in the cell phone/tablet found the solution demand more computing resource than expected. With two powerful computing units, I think Solo platform may be a better solution

For those don't believe OA. Let me say the government has strong desire for surveillance using drones. With face recognition and database, I believe the market has very high potential. Hence I believe the surveillance technology will bring up the OA and the FAA will mandate the OA for safety.

 

[Marich]

At $400-500 price range, it is almost like disposable items. But I think who pick up the Solo design will add feature to justify the price increase. I believe off the bat, OA (object avoidance) will be among the first.

The reason I believe Solo design will live on because OA will be a FAA mandated item. Those who implemented into the firmware or in the cell phone/tablet found the solution demand more computing resource than expected. With two powerful computing units, I think Solo platform may be a better solution

For those don't believe OA. Let me say the government has strong desire for surveillance using drones. With face recognition and database, I believe the market has very high potential. Hence I believe the surveillance technology will bring up the OA and the FAA will mandate the OA for safety.

I highly doubt object avoidance will be mandated. For starters, all RC craft must now be registered (of certain weight of course), not only does but planes and traditional copters. How the heck do you until use object avoidance on a two meter sailplane or a quarter-scale, 150 mph warbird?
Also, mandating it would amount to a recognition that incompetent flight was the norm rather than the exception, ie., over populated areas and in extremely close proximity to observers.
Obviously the more safety features the better, and object avoidance is highly desirable, but I want it because I want it, not because I'm forced to have it.

 

[SirCrashAlot]

I would hapily pay money to keep my Solos flying and to enhance their capabilities. I'm probably not the only one who would. Since the R&D, etc are sunk written-off costs, making more should be fairly cheap. Someone has the injection molds & PCB masks in storage somewhere.

Example: I'd pay up to $500 for a reliable sense & avoid system. If 10% of the 50k solos buy the upgrade, that's $500 x 5000 units = $2.5M at 10% penetration.

If there is a market, there will be a product.

Chicken & egg, I know. The argument only gets better "IF" 3DR could continue to sell the Solo at the BestBuy price. Even if at minimal profit this will undercut the competition and create a market to sell more profitable accessories into.

Chris made the huge mistake of over-pricing his drone. But from what I read from his @twitter feed, it sounds like he's moving on. So who knows?

 

[quick_dry]

I also don't think obstacle avoidance will be mandated, FAA don't care if you can avoid a tree, the real concern is planes, which means ADS-B. I can see some requirements for ADS-B on UAS over a certain size, and/or wanting to operate in certain airspace.
They couldn't require it on everything or you'd likely overwhelm the band with squawks every time someone held a mini-quad race meet.

 

[yt lee]

I highly doubt object avoidance will be mandated. For starters, all RC craft must now be registered (of certain weight of course), not only does but planes and traditional copters. How the heck do you until use object avoidance on a two meter sailplane or a quarter-scale, 150 mph warbird?
Also, mandating it would amount to a recognition that incompetent flight was the norm rather than the exception, ie., over populated areas and in extremely close proximity to observers.
Obviously the more safety features the better, and object avoidance is highly desirable, but I want it because I want it, not because I'm forced to have it.

Just like car seat belts, whether you like it or hate it, it will come with your drone. The manufacturer want to minimize their liberity, and show the faa that they are serious about safety, so they will push it.

Another feature coming down the pipe is components redundancies.

As I said whether you like it or not is immaterial, you can hold your breath until you turn blue but the manufacturers have to follow the government regulations to certify their drone airworthiness and to stay in business.

 

[yt lee]

I would hapily pay money to keep my Solos flying and to enhance their capabilities. I'm probably not the only one who would. Since the R&D, etc are sunk written-off costs, making more should be fairly cheap. Someone has the injection molds & PCB masks in storage somewhere.

Example: I'd pay up to $500 for a reliable sense & avoid system. If 10% of the 50k solos buy the upgrade, that's $500 x 5000 units = $2.5M at 10% penetration.

If there is a market, there will be a product.

Chicken & egg, I know. The argument only gets better "IF" 3DR could continue to sell the Solo at the BestBuy price. Even if at minimal profit this will undercut the competition and create a market to sell more profitable accessories into.

Chris made the huge mistake of over-pricing his drone. But from what I read from his @twitter feed, it sounds like he's moving on. So who knows?

3DR is out of drone manufacturing business. Chris and Collins are concentrating their resources in software. Based on their personnel recruiting target, they are in computational vision or deep thinking. Deep thinking is rather new technology and demands extreme computing resources and large bandwidth. right now, only the research labs like Stanford and MIT are doing it, hence I doubt you will see their products in next year or 2018.

 

[Maddog]

If you design and manufacture the replacement Solo from scratch, the r&d + manufacture+ support+ marketing+ distribution may cost $1000 unit cost.

But to duplicate one, it wouldn't take more than $300 at today's part costs because you don't waste money on r&d etc. The issues now are IP and tainted name. As for marketing and support, it will follow the current knockoff model.

BTW, if you believe it cost more than $300 to assemble a Solo knockoff, you are out of touch regarding Chinese manufacture capacity. Just take a look at wechat drone or xioami drone, check out their prices. Do they selling it at $1000?

Cheerson CX20 has been very successful in the knockoff market selling at sub $200 is another example. Upgrade the cheerson cx20 FC, GPS add a $50 gimbal, you have a decent AP drone for less than a P3S. Replace the firmware with solo, you get yourself a Solo knockoff .

Folk , just because you paid $1000 for your drone doesn't mean it will take another $1000 to replace one. If you still holding on such outdated thinking, I bet you are still holding on your old pc which you paid few thousand for and it's capacity is less than your current smart phone.

Dude- nobody here said they thought it would cost $1000 to replace Solo- you mentioned it.

We're not interested in "a decent AP drone"- we want outstanding. You can have the "decent" drone with OA which the FAA will never mandate.

 

[Maddog]

At $400-500 price range, it is almost like disposable items. But I think who pick up the Solo design will add feature to justify the price increase. I believe off the bat, OA (object avoidance) will be among the first.

The reason I believe Solo design will live on because OA will be a FAA mandated item. Those who implemented into the firmware or in the cell phone/tablet found the solution demand more computing resource than expected. With two powerful computing units, I think Solo platform may be a better solution

For those don't believe OA. Let me say the government has strong desire for surveillance using drones. With face recognition and database, I believe the market has very high potential. Hence I believe the surveillance technology will bring up the OA and the FAA will mandate the OA for safety.

BTW, drones such as Solo, Phantom, etc., are not suitable for surveillance use, as the available time on station is too short.

(I did surveillance work for "the government" in my other life).

Did I mention the FAA will never mandate OA?

 

[quick_dry]

Did I mention the FAA will never mandate OA?

agreed with everything you wrote, what do you expect with ADS-B for automated/autonomous missions and BVLOS? I'm thinking with the little ping transponders available it is reasonable for things Zipline (the company not the smart shot) and other delivery type operation, or something like Matternet

IMO manufacturers could potentially INCREASE their liability if they're making big claims about features in relation to safety. Regular UAS collides with something - go talk to the bozo who flew it there; OA UAS collies with something because the OA failed, and the manufacturer didn't get their wording just right in some promo material... they could be in the firing line.

 

[Mauiwind]

Another feature coming down the pipe is components redundancies.

As I said whether you like it or not is immaterial, you can hold your breath until you turn blue but the manufacturers have to follow the government regulations to certify their drone airworthiness and to stay in business.

 

[Mauiwind]

The FAA could give a rats ass if your motor fails in flight. If there's going to be redundancy it will be because consumers want it. Go ahead, let it fall into the ocean or the forest. As it is, you can't fly over people. Component redundancy is not an issue for safety. If anything, there'll be maintenance required at certain flying hours

Just like car seat belts, whether you like it or hate it, it will come with your drone. The manufacturer want to minimize their liberity, and show the faa that they are serious about safety, so they will push it.

Another feature coming down the pipe is components redundancies.

As I said whether you like it or not is immaterial, you can hold your breath until you turn blue but the manufacturers have to follow the government regulations to certify their drone airworthiness and to stay in business.

.

 

[Jingles]

I talked to one of 3dr solo's mfg engineering guys. I was worried that this drone would not be produced after it was sold out. He assured me that the only reason they are not producing any more is because they have enough to satisfy the retail market. If they sell out then they will start manufacturing again.
This drone is so well engineered
The motors don't even get hot after a run like some competitors do.

I need to find spare motors...don't want to buy a new solo for spare parts. Are they done making parts? If I continue to fly my Solo for business I would like to have some manufacturer support...otherwise I may have to switch brands.

 

[yt lee]

Dude- nobody here said they thought it would cost $1000 to replace Solo- you mentioned it.

We're not interested in "a decent AP drone"- we want outstanding. You can have the "decent" drone with OA which the FAA will never mandate.

If the Chinese decide not to continue the project, when you need a replacement, you may be forced to fork up the green.

As for outstanding AP platform, I don't think Solo is the winner. Ask any professional photographers what are their go to camera, I think Gopro is at the very bottom of a long list. With the latest new Sony camera, the stock Solo has trouble holding position. Add the cost of gimbal and Sony camera, there are better alternative.

 

[Mauiwind]

I need to find spare motors...don't want to buy a new solo for spare parts. Are they done making parts? If I continue to fly my Solo for business I would like to have some manufacturer support...otherwise I may have to switch brands.

3dr is no longer in the business of making hardware. (So says their CEO Chris Anderson)

 

[yt lee]

BTW, drones such as Solo, Phantom, etc., are not suitable for surveillance use, as the available time on station is too short.

(I did surveillance work for "the government" in my other life).

Did I mention the FAA will never mandate OA?

Sail plane is not the only choice for surveillance.
Since you claim doing surveillance for the government, you should know the government is complaining they lack the tool to do surveillance in urban events. I did not say solo or phantom is the right tool but I know several UAV with face recognition are in work.

If you have a very fast Android tablet like Nvidia shield, now you can test a version made for phantom. Unless the Austin guy can catch up, Solo is not in the target list for the reason you already knew.

As OA and components redundancies not mandate by FAA, unless you have better connection than the manufacturer regarding airworthiness certification, you better prepare to pay for features you said you don't need. All new advance FC will have them even the consumer is not asking for them.

 

[Mauiwind]

As OA and components redundancies not mandate by FAA, unless you have better connection than the manufacturer regarding airworthiness certification, you better prepare to pay for features you said you don't need. All new advance FC will have them even the consumer is not asking for them.

So, how do you know what the airworthiness requirements for UAVs will be?

 

[yt lee]

I would hapily pay money to keep my Solos flying and to enhance their capabilities. I'm probably not the only one who would. Since the R&D, etc are sunk written-off costs, making more should be fairly cheap. Someone has the injection molds & PCB masks in storage somewhere.

Example: I'd pay up to $500 for a reliable sense & avoid system. If 10% of the 50k solos buy the upgrade, that's $500 x 5000 units = $2.5M at 10% penetration.

If there is a market, there will be a product.

Chicken & egg, I know. The argument only gets better "IF" 3DR could continue to sell the Solo at the BestBuy price. Even if at minimal profit this will undercut the competition and create a market to sell more profitable accessories into.

Chris made the huge mistake of over-pricing his drone. But from what I read from his @twitter feed, it sounds like he's moving on. So who knows?

I believe Chris mistakes
1. Ignored the Chinese manufacture power
2. Made overtaking DJI as priority.
3. Abandoned his loyal DIY base.
4. Slow to adjust to market change.
5. Over estimated the initial demand.
6. Poorly executed the logistics.
7. Let Gopro had too much influence despite he knew Gopro was designing their own drone.